[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080708074132.7d403e98@the-village.bc.nu>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 07:41:32 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, mchan@...adcom.com,
dwmw2@...radead.org, bastian@...di.eu.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bnx2 - use request_firmware()
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:08:56 -0400
> > Not shipping lots of copies
> > Not leaving crap locked in kernel memory when it isn't needed
> > Letting vendors issue firmware updates (which especially in enterprise
> > space is a big issue and right now gets messy with compiled in firmware)
>
> Do these benefits justify the removal of an actively used feature, one
> more reliable than its replacement?
I think they do for a lot of drivers. And I dispute the actively used
feature claim except for a tiny number of people.
>
> >> I think it is, in fact, the driver maintainer's perogative of whether
> >> they want request_firmware() to be supported by their driver or not.
> >> It is they who have to deal with any possible fallout.
> >
> > And their users and the distributors for whom it can cause enormous pain.
>
> Where is this enormous pain associated with tg3's compiled-in firmware?
> It's been quite convenient.
How many kernel updates do you think all the worlds users and
distributors have transferred. How much bandwidth and time do you think
that cost ?
Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists